Air Force vet arrested for trying to stop flag desecration

[Tekeristan]

I'm a patriot and a soldier and a citizen of the United States. I will never break my oath, I will never dishonor my country. If I saw people burning a flag I would stop them, its my duty to stop them and nobody can tell me any different.

Right. Let's move on, shall we? Back to the topic, which is not you.

Guys move on from this.

[Farnhamia]

Right. Let's move on, shall we? Back to the topic, which is not you.

Guys move on from this.

Indoor voice, please.

[Imperializt Russia]

By attempting to prevent Flag Desecration, you are in violation of the Constitution you swore to uphold. This is not an opinion

This is an opinion and you're not.

Otherwise the moderators would be in violation of the Constitution every time they banned a person for exercising their right to free speech in a rule-breaking but legal manner.

You may not have noticed, but the internet is not the United States of America.

[Wisconsin9]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I would gladly desecrate the flag as a celebration of my freedom to do so.

I imagine.
After all, they do sell American flag underpants, which is desecration even if not meant as such.

Insult me all you like, it doesn't mean you have a valid point.

[New Frenco Empire]

By attempting to prevent Flag Desecration, you are in violation of the Constitution you swore to uphold. This is not an opinion

This is an opinion and you're not.

Otherwise the moderators would be in violation of the Constitution every time they banned a person for exercising their right to free speech in a rule-breaking but legal manner.

People have every right to kick you out of their home for whatever reason.

[Stormwind-City]

By attempting to prevent Flag Desecration, you are in violation of the Constitution you swore to uphold. This is not an opinion

This is an opinion and you're not.

Otherwise the moderators would be in violation of the Constitution every time they banned a person for exercising their right to free speech in a rule-breaking but legal manner.

NS is based in Australia, IIRC.

[Scandinavian Nations]

This is an opinion and you're not.
Otherwise the moderators would be in violation of the Constitution every time they banned a person for exercising their right to free speech in a rule-breaking but legal manner.

You may not have noticed, but the internet is not the United States of America.

That is untrue. As long as both parties involved and the server are in the US of A, the internet is part of the US of A.

So to reiterate - if "by attempting to prevent Flag Desecration, you are in violation of the Constitution", then an internet board's moderators are also in violation of the Constitution every time they ban a person for actions that fall under free speech under the law but break their board's rules.

[Kernen]

By attempting to prevent Flag Desecration, you are in violation of the Constitution you swore to uphold. This is not an opinion

This is an opinion and you're not.

Otherwise the moderators would be in violation of the Constitution every time they banned a person for exercising their right to free speech in a rule-breaking but legal manner.

The moderators took no such oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution. The site is a private site. It is not even a site based in the US. Care to try again on your comparison?

And if you have an explanation how it is somehow not in violation of the oath that soldiers and officers take to defend and uphold the Constitution that actually utilizes reasonable and logical arguments, I'd be happy to hear you out.

[Ifreann]

By attempting to prevent Flag Desecration, you are in violation of the Constitution you swore to uphold. This is not an opinion

This is an opinion and you're not.

Otherwise the moderators would be in violation of the Constitution every time they banned a person for exercising their right to free speech in a rule-breaking but legal manner.

People have a constitutionally protected right to desecrate the US flag. People do not have a constitutionally protected right to post on NSG. Not that I'm aware of, at least.

[Ifreann]

You may not have noticed, but the internet is not the United States of America.

That is untrue. As long as both parties involved and the server are in the US of A, the internet is part of the US of A.

NSG's servers are in Canada.

[Aurinsula]

It absolutely, profoundly boggles my mind that anybody could take exception to what somebody does with their own private, inanimate property. If you buy a thing, you own a thing, and owning a thing means that you can destroy a thing. No further explanation is necessary. It's called liberty, baby.

[Oceanic people]

What she should have done was take good, clear head shots of everyone who walked on the flag. Been obvious about it. Eventually, they would have attacked her and she could then have had THEM arrested!

[Kernen]

What she should have done was take good, clear head shots of everyone who walked on the flag. Been obvious about it. Eventually, they would have attacked her and she could then have had THEM arrested!

No, she couldn't have. Desecration of the US flag is not illegal.

[Arystav]

From my view, take it as you will:
Was the woman legally wrong for taking the flag? Absolutely.
Was she morally wrong? No.

Were the students legally right for desecrating the flag? From what I've seen, yes.
Were they morally wrong for doing so? Yes.

Despite exercising their First Amendment rights, using those freedoms to show such disrespect to the very country that grants those rights is disrespectful to an extreme. I cannot blame a woman who served her country for responding in such a way, as I would imagine myself doing the same.

[Kernen]

From my view, take it as you will:
Was the woman legally wrong for taking the flag? Absolutely.
Was she morally wrong? No.

Were the students legally right for desecrating the flag? From what I've seen, yes.
Were they morally wrong for doing so? Yes.

Despite exercising their First Amendment rights, using those freedoms to show such disrespect to the very country that grants those rights is disrespectful to an extreme. I cannot blame a woman who served her country for responding in such a way, as I would imagine myself doing the same.

How is it morally wrong to express one's right to free speech? How is it morally right to impede on another's right to free speech?

[Ifreann]

What she should have done was take good, clear head shots of everyone who walked on the flag. Been obvious about it. Eventually, they would have attacked her and she could then have had THEM arrested!

No, she couldn't have. Desecration of the US flag is not illegal.

But if she was taking pictures of people doing so, and they objected and attacked her in some way, that probably would be illegal, and would get them arrested. Assuming they attacked her.

[Wisconsin9]

From my view, take it as you will:
Was the woman legally wrong for taking the flag? Absolutely.
Was she morally wrong? No.

Were the students legally right for desecrating the flag? From what I've seen, yes.
Were they morally wrong for doing so? Yes.

Despite exercising their First Amendment rights, using those freedoms to show such disrespect to the very country that grants those rights is disrespectful to an extreme. I cannot blame a woman who served her country for responding in such a way, as I would imagine myself doing the same.

I don't get the point of this kind of thinking. There's no point having freedoms if using them is wrong.

[Kernen]

No, she couldn't have. Desecration of the US flag is not illegal.

But if she was taking pictures of people doing so, and they objected and attacked her in some way, that probably would be illegal, and would get them arrested. Assuming they attacked her.

Yes, however it is not a natural assumption that they would have. And if they did, there's reason to assume that the action would have been considered provoked by the veteran in question, which would likely serve as a mitigating condition for the protesters. Not a very strong one, but mitigating nonetheless.

[Ifreann]

But if she was taking pictures of people doing so, and they objected and attacked her in some way, that probably would be illegal, and would get them arrested. Assuming they attacked her.

Yes, however it is not a natural assumption that they would have.

Indeed it's not. And since campus security were on hand the whole time I expect they'd try to intervene before it actually came to blows.

And if they did, there's reason to assume that the action would have been considered provoked by the veteran in question, which would likely serve as a mitigating condition for the protesters. Not a very strong one, but mitigating nonetheless.

Quite possibly. Like, if she was taking pictures from 20 feet away and someone came up and decked her, there's no mitigating that. But if she was getting in someone's face with her phone and they shoved her back, I could see them getting away with that if Georgia has some kind of "Fighting Words" sort of thing.

[Arystav]

From my view, take it as you will:
Was the woman legally wrong for taking the flag? Absolutely.
Was she morally wrong? No.

Were the students legally right for desecrating the flag? From what I've seen, yes.
Were they morally wrong for doing so? Yes.

Despite exercising their First Amendment rights, using those freedoms to show such disrespect to the very country that grants those rights is disrespectful to an extreme. I cannot blame a woman who served her country for responding in such a way, as I would imagine myself doing the same.

I don't get the point of this kind of thinking. There's no point having freedoms if using them is wrong.

I'm sorry, "From my view" meaning my morals. I'm not discussing this further as I'm a 17 year old in high school with a fairly limited view of the entire world. Debate my post amongst yourselves if you wish.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Despite exercising their First Amendment rights, using those freedoms to show such disrespect to the very country that grants those rights is disrespectful to an extreme.

How is using their right to desecrate a flag as a form of protest disrespecting the nation that gives them said rights? This makes no sense.

I cannot blame a woman who served her country for responding in such a way, as I would imagine myself doing the same.

Then you would be just as hypocritical as she. She served in the military to supposedly safeguard the people and allow them to exercise such rights, and yet she attempts to prevent the very people she took an oath to defend from using the rights given to them.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

I don't get the point of this kind of thinking. There's no point having freedoms if using them is wrong.

I'm sorry, "From my view" meaning my morals. I'm not discussing this further as I'm a 17 year old in high school with a fairly limited view of the entire world. Debate my post amongst yourselves if you wish.

Why bother posting on a debate forum if you are not even willing to defend your stance or debate it?

[Jamzmania]

From my view, take it as you will:
Was the woman legally wrong for taking the flag? Absolutely.
Was she morally wrong? No.

Were the students legally right for desecrating the flag? From what I've seen, yes.
Were they morally wrong for doing so? Yes.

Despite exercising their First Amendment rights, using those freedoms to show such disrespect to the very country that grants those rights is disrespectful to an extreme. I cannot blame a woman who served her country for responding in such a way, as I would imagine myself doing the same.

I don't get the point of this kind of thinking. There's no point having freedoms if using them is wrong.

Just because you have a right to do something doesn't make everything you do with that right morally right. I have the right to spew racist crap about blacks. I can say, "Those dirty niggers defile our country!" and all other sorts of horrible things. Maybe I'll also go buy some Korans and burn them in public while spitting on a picture of Obama.

I have a right to do that, but that doesn't mean I'm morally in the right. Nor should I not expect to get punched in the face for it.

[Wisconsin9]

I don't get the point of this kind of thinking. There's no point having freedoms if using them is wrong.

I'm sorry, "From my view" meaning my morals. I'm not discussing this further as I'm a 17 year old in high school with a fairly limited view of the entire world. Debate my post amongst yourselves if you wish.

I'm a 17 year old in high school and I haven't let it stop me.

[New Frenco Empire]

From my view, take it as you will:
Was the woman legally wrong for taking the flag? Absolutely.
Was she morally wrong? No.

Were the students legally right for desecrating the flag? From what I've seen, yes.
Were they morally wrong for doing so? Yes.

Despite exercising their First Amendment rights, using those freedoms to show such disrespect to the very country that grants those rights is disrespectful to an extreme. I cannot blame a woman who served her country for responding in such a way, as I would imagine myself doing the same.

I don't like desecrating the flag, and I can't really find any instances where I myself would engage in such (unless of course such an act would ever become a crime. Then I'd just burn it to stick it to whichever dickass thought it would be a good idea to bend the constitution over and rob it of whatever innocence it had).

However, that isn't the point; the point is we, as Americans, have that right; despite our personal feelings about it.